Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-04-Speech-3-064"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021204.4.3-064"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have listened with great attention to the speeches we have already heard. This is of course a matter I personally was very heavily involved in as a member of the European Parliament, and I attach the very greatest importance to the decision concerning a Members’ Statute. I should like to say that, as has been pointed out, the Council wishes to help find a solution that guarantees the individual Member dignity and public respect. Regarding the way in which such a statute is to be implemented, I must of course point out that the rules governing its implementation are set down in Article 190, paragraph 5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in which it is stated that it falls to the European Parliament, after seeking an opinion from the Commission and with the approval of the Council, to determine its Members’ status and the general conditions governing the performance of duties. When the Treaty of Nice has come into force, the Council will be able to take decisions by a qualified majority and no longer only by acting unanimously, as has been the case up until now. That does not however apply to taxation arrangements.
Even if it is the case that Parliament adopted a draft proposal for a statute on 3 December 1998, that is to say before the Treaty of Amsterdam came into force, Parliament has since debated the new guidelines, namely in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market. A permanent dialogue has been conducted between the Council’s successive Presidencies and the interlocutors designated by Parliament, namely in the contact group set up to promote the negotiations between the two institutions. As is well known, the Council has not adopted a position on a number of the central features of the future Statute. In that connection, I should like to emphasise a couple of crucial elements.
According to the positions laid down so far by the Council, there must, first of all, be concordance between the Statute and primary law, for example concerning immunities and privileges. Secondly, agreement in the Council on the tax issue must be respected and, finally, there must be transparency and respect for the principle of reimbursing expenses on the basis of expenditure that has in actual fact been incurred. In my view, the statement from the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market from April of this year does not fulfil all these conditions, and I can understand why Parliament’s President has been given the same message in his informal contacts with the governments of the Member States.
I also appreciate why, on the basis of his contacts with the Member States, Parliament’s President has drawn a number of conclusions regarding elements of a compromise which, once the Treaty of Nice has come into force, will be able to attract the necessary majority in the Council. In conclusion, I would therefore welcome all efforts aimed at a solution acceptable to both the Council and Parliament. I should like, on behalf of the Council, to urge Parliament not to let this opportunity pass by. It is Parliament that is to do the proposing and the Council that is to do the approving. The ball lies in Parliament’s court. I would call upon us now to agree to a proposal that can attract broad support in Parliament and that can attract broad enough support in the Council for its to be able to be approved in accordance with the new rules in the Treaty of Nice that will be in force by February."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples